I disagree with the notion that the democrats are new at fighting dirty. I tend to side with the dems on issues and candidates, but they’re not above a roll in the mud and the Clintons do it as well as any. But even if you ignore that, they can only go so far. The Muslim “Manchurian Candidate” email is about as nasty a thing as you’re likely to ever see and that hasn’t really slowed him down. He has a talent for disarming the ridiculous and I think you’re underestimating him.
Yeah, that’s what I was saying, that democracy’s not important. :rolleyes: I think change is important too. Obviously, for whatever reason (some of them excellent, some of them not), people are sick of the Bushes and Clintons. I think it would be a tactical error for the Dems to nominate Clinton. It’s going to be seen as more of the same, and it’s easy to run against more of the same. I think McCain’s actually got a shot against Hillary, but against Obama? He’s going to look like the elderly sell-out he is.
You can argue against people’s reasons for disliking Hillary, but you can’t argue them out of how they feel about her. Like it or not, Americans vote on what they see and how that makes them feel. You can call them names, tell them they’re idiots who need to get a grip, but then you’re just another strident Hillary supporter ridiculing them. How off-putting your condescending know-it-all tone is? That’s how people see her, and that’s why they don’t like her. YOU need to get a grip, and so does Hillary if she wants the nomination. Sorry if that offends your sense of rationality and rightness, but that’s how it is.
I was sick of Bill Clinton by 1996, and I’m totally disgusted with him now. I think he’s not helping her image much and I wish he’d STFU. And yes, that’s because I hate peace and prosperity. 
Clinton supporter too dumb to understand hyperbole. Film at eleven.
Yeah, that’s kind of the point, super genius. There’s a huge chunk of the electorate in this country who would not, under any circumstances, vote for Hillary Clinton. But some of them will vote for Barrack Obama. What does this tell you about their relative electability? Oh, wait, sorry, that’s an unfair question to ask you. You’d have to be smart enough to understand basic arithmetic to answer that.
Yeah, we’ve clearly got the smarter, and more discerning electorate, as you’ve so clearly demonstrated. It’s halfwits like you that have lost us the White House eight years running now. Do us all a favor, shut the fuck up, and let us run a candidate who won’t fuck up and lose yet another election, m’kay? Thanks! Bye! Kisses!
Hillary isn’t just hated by the right; she’s also roundly disliked by many on the left. Dems and independents who don’t “blindly hate” her, but wouldn’t vote for her based on her stance on Iraq, her health care plan, her campaign tactics, etc. Hell, I know at least two Democratic women who still haven’t forgiven her for her cookie-baking remark. Why should Dems and indepents suck it up and vote for someone they dislike when they prefer another candidate? Because it’s “her turn”? Fuck that noise.
“People”? :dubious: “ObviouslY” being based on Clinton’s vote and delegate totals, that is?
Puh-leeze.
You *can * make them consider why they have those feelings. And, short of that, you can at least expose the lies they feel compelled to repeat as a result of them. See above.
It happens all the time on this board. When ignorance is fought, the ignorant are so rarely appreciative of it. But when both facts and reason are on one side, those persons on that side hardly need to feel ashamed of it, now do they?
Don’t you think we can all be better than that? That we can examine and overcome our baser instincts and improve not only our own lives but our nation’s as well? That’s what Obama is preaching, and quite well. To continue to embrace your visceral personal hatreds and ignorances is not consistent with any goal of what we should be or what we need to be. IOW, yes, grow the fuck up.
Yet another example of your putting hatred above fact. Why *ever * would you wish to *defend * that?
I think Hillary is pretty great. I just happen to think that Obama is better. It’s a position that I share with a lot of folks. I have no issue with the Hill and if she is the nominee I will proudly vote for her.
I think there’s a lot of media emphasis on the frothing edges of the Obama army, with little to no attention paid to the middle- people who think he’s talking sense, and so is she, but you know what- maybe it’s time to try idealism instead of pragmatism. That is unquestionably where they break- Clinton wants to work the system, and Obama is saying that the system has no clothes and we need to change it.
I think that Obama’s goal is vastly more difficult to achieve- but I think he just may be able to make some progress towards it- he’s a politician the likes of which we haven’t seen in a long time- and incredibly he seems dedicated to the ideals of transparency and accountability. I am thrilled that he’s made it this far.
But please don’t misinterpret this as animosity towards Hillary. She’s always been impressive to me and I think it’s a crying shame that she ends up being on the downside of this choice.
You’re right: among the party faithful that vote in primaries, Clinton is pretty popular. The question that isn’t well-answered so far in any polls I’ve seen is how that translates to general popularity. The closest I’ve seen are suggestions that she’d have a very difficult time running against McCain.
A thought experiment: suppose that you’re the ignorant, and that the other side is the side with facts and reason on their side. In that experiment, how does your response look: does it look appreciative, or does it look resentful, smug in ignorance, and generally immune to having ignorance fought?
Now, what makes you so sure you’re in the right?
I lean increasingly toward Obama; this lean has been the product of a move that’s taken longer than a decade away from purely position-based voting. It’s partly been Obama’s personality that’s forced this move, but it’s also been Clinton’s personality: it’s taken her shenanigans, contrasted against Obama’s, to get me to conclude that I’d rather have a person of integrity who supports a moderate number of my positions than a person of little integrity who supports a large number of my positions.
Daniel
Perhaps the glaze over your eyes prevents you from discerning the text on your monitor. I prefer Obama, you stupid fuck. I just think these are two equally matched candidates in positions, in national polling, and more or less in primary votes to this point. I don’t like the Obamaniacs need to try to advance their candidate through this steady stream of crazy smears about Clinton. Including “hyperbole” associating her with a notorious axe murderess.
I prefer Obama too, for many of the same reasons, although I wouldn’t assume that he wouldn’t have voted the same way on several issues, given the fact that he has tried to appeal to the right during the Democratic primaries!
But disliking her for her health plan, or cookies comment? That’s just insane conservative bullshit. Universal health care should be part of the Democratic platform.
A hypothetical, as you well know from your own previous failed efforts to find a good real example. Want to try again, big boy? :rolleyes:
You can start by reading the comments from Rubystreak I was replying to.
I don’t think I’ve seen anything suggesting that she would have a “very hard time” against McCain. She and Obama seem to do approximatley equally well in matchups with McCain in all of the polling I’ve seen.
Well said. I agree with everything in your post.
According to RealClearPolitics.com, the average of recent polls shows Hillary losing to McCain by 1.6 points while Obama beats McCain by 3.3 points.
Exactly my point. Unless you are contending that the margin of error of the polls from which those mean differences were aggregated were greater than 3 or 4 points. That is in fact, essentially equal. Thanks very much.
That’s the average of polls; I’ve seen polls that suggested Clinton had a very hard time beating McCain. It’s encouraging to see that on average she’s polling just a couple points below him.
Daniel
There are three problems with your argument (four if you count you being a dick about it). First, a couple of the Obama polls do have him beating McCain outside the margin of error. Second, when you aggregate polls, and they all show the same positive result, it minimizes the role of some sources of statistical error. Third, even among each poll itself, the trend has been toward Obama, which as you ought to know is a good way to account for error
What did Hillary say about cookie baking???
Sorry, forgot to log-out** Left Hand**.
This is ancient history, but when Bill was running for president in 1992, Hillary infamouly said, “I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.” A lot of folks viewed this as a slam against women who take time off work to stay home with their kids.
Is it stupid to hold it against her now? I think so, but as I wrote, I know women who do.
There are plenty of moderate and conservative Democrats who disagree with you on that, as well as lots of independent voters. You may disagree with them, but I wouldn’t call them insane.
This is the Pit. It’s required.
There’s another problem you didn’t mention, though: It’s February. The election is in November. One of the greatest logical fallacies we see in election season is based on polls that ask “If the election were being held tomorrow …” when it *ain’t * being held tomorrow. The date controls the flow of opinion. Trend lines will start to mean something in October - but no sooner.
Everybody just relax and enjoy the baseball season in the meanwhile - it’ll start, happen, and finish before the campaign season does.